I thought the most interesting part was the answer to the last question Mr Twyford asked:

Phil Twyford: Is the Minister aware of a 2008 report prepared by Sinclair Knight Merz consultants—the current consultants working on the Pūhoi to Wellsford project—that said that “the scope for substantial economic growth with the upgrading of SH1 is limited.”, and “Even a significant increase in this contribution of the project [to tourism] would be modest when set against the likely costs of road upgrading.”, and does he agree with the project’s consultants on this matter?

Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: I am aware that when any huge projects of the nature of the roads of national significance are proposed, a wide range of views are held. Those who are opposed to building roading networks come out with some of the most shonky figures to try to prove why you should not do them, and those who support them come out with their numbers. I think the numbers that the New Zealand Transport Agency is using, which are well founded, well analysed, and well based on, are the actual numbers that this House should give some credence to.

The “shonky figures” referred to come from this report, and in particular the section of that report shown below:

The really interesting thing is that the same consultants who prepared this 2008 report are still the lead consultants providing NZTA with advice on Puhoi-Wellsford. I wonder whether Mr Williamson’s comments were merely ignorant of this fact, or whether he accidentally let slip that the project really is based on “shonky” advice?

Lets hope that either Labour or the Greens will now start to turn up the heat more by pointing out that the ‘shonky figures’ Maurice Wiliamson and others in the National Party talk about, are not the figures quoted in opposition to the Puhoi-Wellsford project and other RoNs but the figures that NZTA are using to justify the projects – figures that either Sinclair Knight Merz are ‘made’ to provide NZTA or simply figures that NZTA are literally making up to order for their political masters.

‘Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: I am aware that when any huge projects of the nature of the roads of national significance are proposed, a wide range of views are held. Those who are opposed to building roading networks come out with some of the most shonky figures to try to prove why you should not do them, and those who support them come out with their numbers. I think the numbers that the New Zealand Transport Agency is using, which are well founded, well analysed, and well based on, are the actual numbers that this House should give some credence to.’

Nice slip up Mr Williamson.

‘The really interesting thing is that the same consultants who prepared this 2008 report are still the lead consultants providing NZTA with advice on Puhoi-Wellsford.’

Exactly! This is going to be good material for the Greens and Labour to work with next week. What external factor changed from when the 2008 report was written, and the now changed set of figures offered up by Sinclair Knight Merz. Oh yeah – that’s right, the government changed. Obviously, this organisation ( http://www.skmconsulting.com/ ) could only provide ‘shonky figures’. Clearly they needed to have their analysis corrected by those incoming experts in roading planning, costs and benefits – the Nats. I feel a Tui’s moment coming on…….